Is Viv Richards an Overrated Test Batsman?

[sachin200]

Lot of people (including Imran Khan who apparently believe he is the best batsman he has seen) believe that Viv Richard is one of the best TEST batsman ever. but one look at his record may create some doubts.

His overall test Record

Mat Inn NO Runs H.S Ave 100 50 0 4s 6s

121 182 12 8540 291 50.23 24 45 10 1051+ 84

His overall record suggests that he is one of the finest but a detailed look may create some doubts.......

Here we can see that he has comparatively struggled against AUS and PAK

This suggests that he struggled against quality pace bowlers in Tests. I for one believe that BC Lara is the best west Indian TEST batsman ever.

I want to know the opinion of you guys.

 

[ankitj]

In that era, an average of 40-45 against good side could hardly be considered "struggling". It will also be interesting to see how his figures look if we remove his last 4 years of so.

It's always interesting to look at cumulative averages, and considering where a cricketer's average would have ended if circumstances allowed or forced him to retire earlier.

Will be keen to hear views from others too on Viv.

 

[Migara]

Is that the Imran / Hadlee / Lillee effect?

 

[ankitj]

And despite his low average, Wisden 100 exercise at the turn of the century placed Viv Richard 3rd on the batsmen's list. Their formulae apparently did take quality of opposition and venues (home/away), match circumstances etc into account.

 

[aussie tragic]

How is averaging 40+ show that he struggled against Aus and Pak?

I rate Viv as the greatest I've ever seen (live or on TV) which includes the likes of Gavaskar, G. Chappell, Miandad, Abbas, Lloyd, Ponting, Lara, Dravid, Kallis, Tendulker, Border, S.Waugh....

....btw, Viv averaged 60.16 after 45 tests, which was God like at the time...he should not be judged in his final average when he obviously played on for far too long...

 

[Shri]

I have got one word to say to Viv:

SEHWAG!

He is going to take that "Aggressor" title off you.

 

[Fusion]

How is averaging 40+ show that he struggled against Aus and Pak?

I rate Viv as the greatest I've ever seen (live or on TV) which includes the likes of Gavaskar, G. Chappell, Miandad, Abbas, Lloyd, Ponting, Lara, Dravid, Kallis, Tendulker, Border, S.Waugh....

....btw, Viv averaged 60.16 after 45 tests, which was God like at the time...he should not be judged in his final average when he obviously played on for far too long...

This.

 

[ankitj]

A look at Viv Richards' cumulative averages tells you that if he retired after 87 tests (same number of tests played by another great batsman of that generation - Greg Chappel) he would have averaged about as much as Chappel. Point I am trying to make is that the average at the end of a player's career is not how much he always averaged.

 

[vcs]

If I were making a case against Viv Richards, I really wouldn't try to argue that he struggled against pace.

 

[kingkallis]

I too think Lara > or == Richards,

Richards played against the ATGs like Lillee, Botham, Hadlee, Imran and good bowlers like Thomson, Kapil, Willis.

Also lets not forget that he played with some of the Windies greats like Greenidge, Lloyd, Haynes, Richardson hence less pressure on Viv.

Lara played against the likes of McGrath, McDermott, Donald, Pollock, Wasim, Waqar, Gough, Muralitharan, Warne, Kumble

Bowling attacks of 90s is considered the most lethal and thats the time where Lara played!

Lara had to face the song alone, cause he had only Chanderpaul or occassionally Jimmy Adams with him...

 

[aussie tragic]

Bowling attacks of 90s is considered the most lethal and thats the time where Lara played!

Okay, so the 70-80's obviously had poor bowlers like Snow, Willis, Lillee, Thomson, Garner, Marshall, Holding, Roberts, Croft, Botham, Hadlee, Sarfraz, Imran, Dev, Akram, McDermott, Hughes....etc

 

[ankitj]

Bowling attacks of 90s is considered the most lethal and thats the time where Lara played!

I also disagree with that. 80's pace bowlers marginally better than those of 90's. 90's spinners though substantially better than those of 80's.

 

[zaremba]

If you're going to rate batsmen purely by their career averages then, yes, Viv Richards was not in the top handful of batsmen of all time.

What this tells me is, don't rate batsmen purely by their career averages.

Pretty simple really

 

[weldone]

Okay, so the 70-80's obviously had poor bowlers like Snow, Willis, Lillee, Thomson, Garner, Marshall, Holding, Roberts, Croft, Botham, Hadlee, Sarfraz, Imran, Dev, Akram, McDermott, Hughes....etc

Not disagreeing with the point you are making in general, but do the names in bold really matter in this context?

 

[0RI0N]

Okay, so the 70-80's obviously had poor bowlers like Snow, Willis, Lillee, Thomson, Garner, Marshall, Holding, Roberts, Croft, Botham, Hadlee, Sarfraz, Imran, Dev, Akram, McDermott, Hughes....etc

Please show ITT where kingkallis said 70/80s bowlers were poor?
I'll head over to youtube while you get the post.

 

[aussie tragic]

Not disagreeing with the point you are making in general, but do the names in bold really matter in this context?

Considering that he qouted "Bowling attacks of 90s is considered the most lethal" I think yes, as I can't think of anything more lethal than the WI attack of the 80"s...

 

[aussie tragic]

Please show ITT where kingkallis said 70/80s bowlers were poor?
I'll head over to youtube while you get the post.

Please show me the post that confims 90's bowlers were the most lethal....

 

[weldone]

Considering that he qouted "Bowling attacks of 90s is considered the most lethal" I think yes, as I can't think of anything more lethal than the WI attack of the 80"s...

He didn't say 'pace attack'. Bowling attack of the 90s, as a whole, might be considered slightly better than that in the 80s (or 70s). In terms of pace bowling, they are certainly comparable; and in terms of spin bowling, well...

I don't think any other single decade saw as many great bowlers of different variety as the 90's: Muralitharan, McGrath, Ambrose, Akram, Donald, Warne, Waqar, Pollock, Walsh, Kumble etc...(not considering Imran, Kapil and Botham who were clearly past their prime by then)

 

[fredfertang]

IMO if anything Viv Richards is underrated as a Test batsman - its just plain wrong to judge him on averages - if he'd been a man who chased records for the sake of it he'd have scored hundreds more runs, got out rather less often, and batted much more selfishly and for longer on decent tracks - couldn't stand him on a personal level - but the most awesome batsman I've ever seen

 

[Himannv]

IMO if anything Viv Richards is underrated as a Test batsman - its just plain wrong to judge him on averages - if he'd been a man who chased records for the sake of it he'd have scored hundreds more runs, got out rather less often, and batted much more selfishly and for longer on decent tracks - couldn't stand him on a personal level - but the most awesome batsman I've ever seen

Agree with this, except the last line. His stats dont include the match winning qualities he had.

Agree with those that say Lara is better than Viv as a test batsman though. Personally feel that Lara is the third best batsman of all time after Bradman and Tendulkar.